Relocation and sale go hand in hand right now, that's why the two committees were joined up. An approved sale to Hansen would mean relocation to Seattle. I don't expect anything this week no more. This whole thing is stupid right now.

Asked if the Sacramento bid will match the increased offer Seattle’s Chris Hansen announced Friday night, Johnson said "I don’t think that was our focus." “The last ditch effort by the Chris Hansen group, he has his prerogative to do that. We felt we made good on what we said we are going to do. I think the NBA and the Maloofs are comfortable with that.”

I think the things they'll be considering from here on out are: just approving the Seattle deal or figuring out which side gets expansion (I'd guess Sacramento, as it's a down the line conditional promise rather than the straight up signed, sealed, delivered promise it'd have to be for Seattle.

The Outfield wrote:Man, I don't want to wait 1-2 more years for an expansion. It would definitely be better than nothing, but I am tired of waiting.

I'm gonna be pisstified if we gotta wait for expansion.

If they follow that up with "but here come the Coyotes next season!" I can deal.

I really don't think it makes sense to promise expansion to Seattle and let the Sacramento be without anything binding from that city or ownership group as of yet, from a business perspective. Sac will have no incentive to move briskly if their last real threat of relocation is gone.

Interesting comments today by Calabro over on 710 ESPN today. For those who might have missed it, he said he believes expansion is an option here. He could envision a scenario where Seattle gets the Kings and Sacramento gets the promise of an expansion team in 2 years (if they get their ducks all in a row) ... BUT he believes it's also quite possible the Kings stay in Sacramento and Seattle gets the promise of an expansion franchise within 2 years. Here is the link so you can listen for yourself ...

As the Blazers owner and the Seahawks owner it seems like it would make smart business sense to keep another franchise out of the northwest so he wouldnt have to fight for the sports fans dollar, or for the sponsorship money. But then as a Seattle native, obviously he would probably want an NBA team there. Is my recollection correct that he and Cuban were the only 2 that voted against Seattle leaving? Will he show the same loyalty to the fans of Sacramento as he did to the fans of Seattle? Or loyalty to his city, even though it will be in direct competition against two of his ownership entitites?

My gut is that he'll vote to move the Kings to Seattle. But it will be interesting to see.

But as a committee of NBA team owners met here today to sort out the tug-of-war between the two cities,a source close to the situation described Sacramento's bid as a "non-binding term sheet."

Niiiiiiiiice

This source, who wasn't authorized to speak publicly, said Sacramento's bid would require the Maloof family, which controls the team, to terminate its deal with Seattle investor Chris Hansen even before the Sacramento group negotiates a final, binding offer. Under such a scenario, the NBA Board of Governors wouldn't even vote on the Hansen deal. The source added that, unlike Hansen, the Sacramento group's offer doesn't include a deposit.

Nice little touch one screwing yourself over already with the non-binding, then you ask the Maloofs to drop their leverage? How did these clowns become wealthy???

I hope the Kings players are looking for apartments in Seattle, this thing is OVER!

And now on Chris Daniels twitter, the offer isn't matching, on top of non binding, did they just mail it in? Or were ever serious? There's some 'splaining to be done to the Sacramento fans if this is true. They got bamboozled to the fullest extent of bamboozlement.

Throwdown wrote:And now on Chris Daniels twitter, the offer isn't matching, on top of non binding, did they just mail it in? Or were ever serious? There's some 'splaining to be done to the Sacramento fans if this is true. They got bamboozled to the fullest extent of bamboozlement.

Honestly Throw, it's really not surprising. An exNBA player that's mayor needs to at least "try" to keep the team in town...sigh...

JSeahawks wrote:It will be interesting to see where Paul Allen votes on this.

As the Blazers owner and the Seahawks owner it seems like it would make smart business sense to keep another franchise out of the northwest so he wouldnt have to fight for the sports fans dollar, or for the sponsorship money. But then as a Seattle native, obviously he would probably want an NBA team there. Is my recollection correct that he and Cuban were the only 2 that voted against Seattle leaving? Will he show the same loyalty to the fans of Sacramento as he did to the fans of Seattle? Or loyalty to his city, even though it will be in direct competition against two of his ownership entitites?

My gut is that he'll vote to move the Kings to Seattle. But it will be interesting to see.

Paul Allen grew up loving the Sonics - he tried to buy them but they were not available at the time - Paul Allen will vote WITH ENTHUSIASM to move the Kings to Seattle.

I'm confused, but I'll layout one potential reason for Sac's offer: Could they know that they have 8 votes to hold up the Seattle sale and by asking the Maloofs to back out before the vote they, Maloofs, could still get a decent amount of dough when they could get nothing when/if they the BOG denies the Seattle sale. I want to positive and happy, but until that vote happens and we have our Sonics back, thoughts like this will continue to run through my head.

Blitzer88 wrote:I'm confused, but I'll layout one potential reason for Sac's offer: Could they know that they have 8 votes to hold up the Seattle sale and by asking the Maloofs to back out before the vote they, Maloofs, could still get a decent amount of dough when they could get nothing when/if they the BOG denies the Seattle sale. I want to positive and happy, but until that vote happens and we have our Sonics back, thoughts like this will continue to run through my head.

If they knew they had 8 votes, then why ask for the Maloofs to drop the deal with Hansen?

They have the back up offer there if he's denied.

They don't have 8 votes and they weren't serious to begin with is how I'm seeing it.

Blitzer88 wrote:I'm confused, but I'll layout one potential reason for Sac's offer: Could they know that they have 8 votes to hold up the Seattle sale and by asking the Maloofs to back out before the vote they, Maloofs, could still get a decent amount of dough when they could get nothing when/if they the BOG denies the Seattle sale. I want to positive and happy, but until that vote happens and we have our Sonics back, thoughts like this will continue to run through my head.

If they knew they had 8 votes, then why ask for the Maloofs to drop the deal with Hansen?

So they wouldn't have to go through the process or save them from embarrassment?

Reading Sonicrising, most were pretty pumped earlier when the Sac's bid details came out, now it seems as if they think something fishy is going on. I do not like this being drawn out, it spells bad news for us.

Well, people aren't happy because this is getting absurd. Hansen's PSA deserves an up or down vote and not to be delayed over and over to accommodate Sacramento whose first offer wasn't good enough, whose presentation wasn't good enough, whose latest offer wasn't good enough, who has not put any money down, that has just not done enough.

Look at their strategy. They want the Seattle PSA erased so they can negotiate with the Maloofs, that's why matching isn't an issue for them, because they don't want there to be anything to match. Well, that's not happening. I think the odds that Seattle gets the Kings are really high and that most of this is about discussing how to possibly help Sacramento get a new team if they can live up to their promises. The Maloofs aren't taking less money.

I don't know.......I just don't feel great about how things are playing out for us and H/B/N. I wish I was as confident as others are, but this being dragged out for another 2-3 weeks is not good for us.